| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | saiken(at)quietlycompetent(dot)com, Simone Aiken <saiken(at)ulfheim(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: ToDo List Item - System Table Index Clustering |
| Date: | 2011-01-19 19:26:02 |
| Message-ID: | 24907.1295465162@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Simone Aiken
> <saiken(at)quietlycompetent(dot)com> wrote:
>> Pages like this one have column comments for the system tables:
>>
>> http://www.psql.it/manuale/8.3/catalog-pg-attribute.html
> Oh, I see. I don't think we want to go there. We'd need some kind of
> system for keeping the two places in sync.
I seem to recall some muttering about teaching genbki to extract such
comments from the SGML sources or perhaps the C header files. I tend to
agree though that it would be a lot more work than it's worth. And as
you say, pg_description entries aren't free.
Which brings up another point though. I have a personal TODO item to
make the comments for operator support functions more consistent:
http://archives.postgresql.org/message-id/21407.1287157253@sss.pgh.pa.us
Should we consider removing those comments altogether, instead?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2011-01-19 19:31:02 | REVIEW: patch: remove redundant code from pl_exec.c |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2011-01-19 19:25:59 | Re: ToDo List Item - System Table Index Clustering |